SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Uncertainty visualization”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

Pre-Transient Characterization of Historic EBR-II Pins for Transient Testing

Current interest in sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) designs, such as TerraPower’s Natrium Reactor, has highlighted the need for advanced reactor fuel technology development. Modern U-Zr and U- Pu-Zr pin designs are primary candidates to fuel SFRs and boast high fuel utilization capacity, increased fuel-cladding compatibility, and improved safety through inherent feedback mechanisms. Despite over 60 years of metallic fuel irradiation, uncertainties exist in the performance of the fuel system, particularly under transient overpower (TOP) and loss of flow (LOF) scenarios. Throughout historical testing within the Experimental Breeder Reactor II (EBR-II) and the Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF), fuel behavior has demonstrated benign response to transient reactor conditions; however, accurate predictions of failure thresholds to inform operational limitations rely heavily on fuel composition, burnup, and irradiation history. In expanding TOP and LOF testing, the Transient Heat sink Overpower Response (THOR) Capsule will be used to test modern fuel technologies in a static sodium environment in the Transient Reactor Test (TREAT) Facility. The THOR capsule is highly instrumented and will provide time-dependent thermal behavior of SFR fuel pins subjected to accident conditions within TREAT. The THOR-Metallic (THOR- M) campaign aims to validate and expand historical TOP and LOF testing on high burnup U-Zr and U-Pu- Zr fuel alloys previously irradiated in EBR-II by running the rods to failure. This contribution focuses primarily on the pre-transient engineering-scale destructive and non- destructive characterization that has been conducted on both the test and sibling pins used for the TOP and LOF tests. All pins underwent visual examination, neutron radiography, element contact profilometry, and precise gamma scan. The sibling pins used for each test were further analyzed using gas assay, sampling, and recharge analysis (GASR), and optical microscopy. The results from each technique confirmed that the fuel pins were intact and devoid of any atypical developments when compared to historical data. Additionally, the analyzed measurements establish a baseline for comparison to post-transient analysis. Key fuel behaviors quanitifed include axial elongation of the fuel column, diametral strain of the pin, patterns in fluff structure geometry, changes in axial isotope distribution, evolution of constituent redistribution, porosity, and fission gas release. The pre-transient measurements and changes attributed to transient behavior from post-transient measurement will be compared to historical data to capture the behavioral dependence on composition, burnup, and irradiation history. Results from this work advance the initiatives of the THOR-M campaign, which aid in informing fuel performance models and establishing safety criteria for SFR operational limits. The novel combination of test environment, in-situ instrumentation, and comprehensive suite of characterization methods provides greater understanding of transient fuel behavior. Overall, information on the time and condition of pin failure for high burnup U-Pu-Zr will greatly expand the limited existing TOP and LOF test data.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Pre-Transient Characterization of Historic EBR-II Pins for Transient Testing

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-109: Evaluation of Deformable Accumulated Parotid Doses Using Different Registration Algorithms in Adaptive Head and Neck Radiotherapy

Purpose: Three deformable image registration (DIR) algorithms are utilized to perform deformable dose accumulation for head and neck tomotherapy treatment, and the differences of the accumulated doses are evaluated. Methods: Daily MVCT data for 10 patients with pathologically proven nasopharyngeal cancers were analyzed. The data were acquired using tomotherapy (TomoTherapy, Accuray) at the PLA General Hospital. The prescription dose to the primary target was 70Gy in 33 fractions.Three DIR methods (B-spline, Diffeomorphic Demons and MIMvista) were used to propagate parotid structures from planning CTs to the daily CTs and accumulate fractionated dose on the planning CTs. The mean accumulated doses of parotids were quantitatively compared and the uncertainties of the propagated parotid contours were evaluated using Dice similarity index (DSI). Results: The planned mean dose of the ipsilateral parotids (32.42±3.13Gy) was slightly higher than those of the contralateral parotids (31.38±3.19Gy)in 10 patients. The difference between the accumulated mean doses of the ipsilateral parotids in the B-spline, Demons and MIMvista deformation algorithms (36.40±5.78Gy, 34.08±6.72Gy and 33.72±2.63Gy ) were statistically significant (B-spline vs Demons, P<0.0001, B-spline vs MIMvista, p =0.002). And The difference between those of the contralateral parotids in the B-spline, Demons and MIMvista deformation algorithms (34.08±4.82Gy, 32.42±4.80Gy and 33.92±4.65Gy ) were also significant (B-spline vs Demons, p =0.009, B-spline vs MIMvista, p =0.074). For the DSI analysis, the scores of B-spline, Demons and MIMvista DIRs were 0.90, 0.89 and 0.76. Conclusion: Shrinkage of parotid volumes results in the dose increase to the parotid glands in adaptive head and neck radiotherapy. The accumulated doses of parotids show significant difference using the different DIR algorithms between kVCT and MVCT. Therefore, the volume-based criterion (i.e. DSI) as a quantitative evaluation of registration accuracy is essential besides the visual assessment by the treating physician. This work was supported in part by the grant from Chinese Natural Science Foundation (Grant No. 11105225)

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

NGEE Arctic Plant Traits: Plant Community Composition, Kougarok Road Mile Marker 64, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2016

This dataset reports the characteristics of the dominant vegetation communities at the NGEE Arctic Kougarok field site, Kougarok Road Mile Marker 64 on the Seward Peninsula. Selected plots were surveyed from 18-23 July 2016. Environmental data (e.g., elevation, slope, soil moisture regime, disturbance type and degree, mean canopy height, etc.) were also recorded for each plot. Elevation measurements were updated 2020-08-18. All plant species (vascular plants, bryophytes and lichens) were recorded along with their percent cover in the plots as determined visually by the lead author. Plots were chosen subjectively in areas of homogeneous and representative vegetation and varied in size from 1-25 m2 depending on canopy structure and height. The site is an east-facing hillslope with vegetation that varies from the summit to the toeslope. The 30 total plots were selected as five replicate plots sampled from each of the six identified habitat types: 1) non-acidic mountain complex at the hillcrest, 2) dwarf-shrub lichen tundra on the shoulder, 3) alder shrublands predominantly on an elevational band across the backslope, 4) willow-birch tundra on the upper backslope, 5) tussock tundra on the footslope in inter-water tracks, and 6) tussock tundra mixed with willow-birch tundra or alder savanna in poor developed water tracks on the footslope. This dataset is comprised of two comma-separated (*.csv) files containing species and environmental data for the plant community composition plots. It also contains seven zipped folders of plot photographs, one map showing plot locations (*.pdf), one blank datasheet with the key to codes used in the field (*.pdf), select photos organized in a (*.pdf), and one User file (*.pdf). The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Reliable and Efficient Machine Learning (Final Technical Report)

Modern scientific experiments generate massive amounts of data at a pace much faster than humans can manually analyze. While machine learning has revolutionized commercial data analysis (such as recommending movies or recognizing faces), applying these tools to complex scientific discovery is challenging because scientific answers must be precise, interpretable, and adhere to physical laws. The research under this project aims to develop new mathematical tools and computer algorithms specifically designed for scientific applications. Major progress has been made in automatically cleaning and deconstructing messy experimental data, analyzing the visual information of physical phenomena, determining the underlying physical variables, and providing rig orous mathematical analysis of interesting algorithms and concepts widely used in machine learning. This project addressed the critical gap between our ability to generate massive scientific data and our ability to extract interpretable information from it. We established mathematical foundations for Scientific Machine Learning (SciML) aimed at effective data analytics and automated discovery. Our work focused on three core objectives: (1) developing reliable feature extraction methods for dynamic high-dimensional data, (2) establishing mathematical foundations for discovering dynamics via neural networks, and (3) creating rigorous optimization techniques for these models. Key outcomes come from two fronts. On the practical side, they include the development of algorithms that significantly enhance the extraction of signals from field data, as well as the capability to handle situations that exhibit smooth variations or physical stretching due to temperature changes. They also include the creation of an automated framework for discovering fundamental state variables from raw experimental data, demonstrating the ability to identify intrinsic physical dimensions without prior knowledge of the governing laws. On the theoretical front, the research results in theoretical advances in Optimal Transport, a widely used notion in SciML, specifically regarding functions with fixed-size nodal sets, provide sharp bounds relevant to uncertainty quantification. Meanwhile, the outcomes also include the establishment of convergence theories for nonlocal gradient descent methods, enabling robust optimization with noisy data in high-dimensional settings commonly encountered in scientific modeling. The project also helps creating opportunities to train the next generation of researchers, equipping them with the necessary technical skills for today’s workplace and preparing them for future advances.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

PipeSight: A High-Performance Computing Platform for Pipeline Integrity Management

The Phase I feasibility study completed as part of this project has led to a number of innovative technologies being developed and has laid the foundation for a successful Phase II effort to commercialize a platform for managing the integrity of pipelines for the damage mechanisms of the new, hybrid-energy based economy. To ground the development efforts and direction of the project, an extensive market research and customer discovery effort was undertaken early in Phase I. Through this effort, a number of pipeline owners and operators were interviewed, and the following key findings were discovered about the pipeline industry: • Small pipeline operators do not have the central engineering groups necessary to perform their own independent analysis of inspection data, but instead rely on summarized tally sheets provided to them by inspection service providers. • The time it takes to go from an inspection to a completed engineering assessment, even for small segments of pipeline, can take anywhere from 30-120 days. During this delay, critical threats can (and have been known to) cause failures. • Uncertainty is often not accounted for in the assessment of pipeline integrity. The tally sheets provided by third-party service providers are almost always deterministic in nature, identifying threats that present a concern only to the current (not the future) integrity of the pipeline. • It is uncommon to apply the latest technologies to perform advanced assessments of damaged pipelines. There is a desire to use more advanced analysis capabilities to assess threats. Many pipeline operators indicated that they would often excavate a pipeline to perform an inspection and find that the damage was not as bad as they anticipated, thus using limited resources unnecessarily. Companies are not consistent in their use of inspection data to determine corrosion rates, and those that do only calculate deterministic corrosion rates. • The industry has prominently relied on time-based inspections but has recently started to transition to risk-based inspections. However, there appears to be no uniform guidance on how to do so while properly accounting for all sources of uncertainty. • Companies are not storing inspection data in a manner that allows for the ready determination of temporal trends. • Predictive maintenance principles and practices are beginning to be used by early adopters • Some pipelines are being re-purposed to transport different process fluids than they were designed for, e.g., H 2 and CO 2 rich process streams to serve the new hybrid-energy based economy, which are presenting new integrity concerns for the existing pipeline network that crisscrosses the United States. As a result of these discoveries, we were able to target the development efforts in Phase I to best serve the needs of the industry. In Phase I, we developed a way to correlate multiple large-scale scans of the pipeline to determine a probabilistic corrosion rate that accounts for all sources of error and uncertainty in the inspection process. This probabilistic corrosion rate can be used to predict the future thickness distribution of the pipe wall. We demonstrate how this analysis may be performed in an analytical fashion and has been implemented in such a manner that it can be readily distributed using GPU computing through integration of the Kokkos programming model. We also make a very novel extension of the analytical corrosion rate model to Bayesian Networks (an explainable AI technique) that can account for non-parametric distributions of corrosion rates. With the predictions made above for the probabilistic corrosion rate and corresponding future distribution of the pipe wall thickness, we can assess the integrity of the pipeline through the use of a probabilistic engineering assessment. We developed a novel screening data analysis approach that can rapidly identify ‘hotspots’ (local thin areas) where the integrity of the pipeline is a concern. Once more, we implemented this screening approach in C++ to leverage GPU computing via the Kokkos programming model. After the critical hotspots are identified, we developed a program that can automatically generate an advanced finite element model of the damaged regions. Since the number of damaged regions that require advanced analysis can number in the thousands, we integrated an open-source container-native workflow engine for orchestrating parallel jobs on the cloud. Initially, these advanced numerical models were only designed to account for loading due to internal pressure. However, in a slight pivot from the initial Phase I proposal, we developed a complete pipe stress analysis program (called Simflex) which can simulate the complete pipeline and its response to thermal expansion, pressure, thermal bowing, weight, wind, earthquake, support displacement, support friction and external forces. This pipe stress analysis program was written generically, to handle any piping system, but contains the features needed to model long pipelines (i.e., it incorporates a model for soil mechanics and can account for the nonlinear boundary conditions necessary to simulate long underground pipelines). This pipe stress analysis program can simulate any segment of the pipeline (simple or complex) under any set of conditions and loads, to determine the supplemental loads (axial forces and bending moments) at the location of damage. This enables the most accurate state of stress to be accounted for in the pipeline, which can prove critical when evaluating the integrity of a damaged region. In the process of developing the technologies to perform the integrity assessment of the pipeline, we also extended one of the industry standard approaches for performing the assessment of local thin areas that extend more in the circumferential direction than the longitudinal direction of the pipeline. This approach was presented to the API 579-1/AS ME FFS-1 steering committee in November 2021 for consideration in the next edition of the industry standard for Fitness-For-Service (expected to be released in 2023). To help pipeline operators make decisions with the results on any integrity assessment, we developed a new approach to the life-cycle management of pipelines which uses a Bayesian Decision Network. The network is designed to help pipeline operators plan and prioritize inspection activities and ultimately make smarter, more cost-effective decisions. The Bayesian approach accounts for all sources of uncertainty and carries them through to the final optimal decisions, providing a probabilistic framework for optimizing inspection intervals. The proof-of-concept networks developed in the feasibility study are complete, verified, and are focused on a subset of the pipeline. To expand this novel approach to the scale necessary for an entire network of pipelines in Phase II, we will leverage the DOE-funded Bengi solver for industrial-scale decision making with Bayesian Networks [22]. Once implemented, we will be able to provide the pipeline industry with a much-needed tool for optimal inspection planning using truly explainable artificial intelligence (XAI). To handle all of these advanced capabilities into a cloud-based platform, the architecture of the Equity Engineering Cloud (EEC) was extended to include Argo Workflows, a framework capable of distributing and managing a massive number of jobs that consume their own resources, such that thousands of serial finite element simulations can be run in parallel. As part of this substantial undertaking, we also integrated Argo Continuous Delivery (CD) into the EEC, to aid with the rapid prototyping and iterations that will be imperative to the success of the PipeSight platform’s Agile development process in Phase II. As part of the pipe stress analysis program, we also developed a custom visualizer that leverages the DOE-funded VTK visualization library. We added custom contouring capabilities and a means for interacting visually with both the inputs and outputs of the pipe stress analysis program. We also developed routines for automating the post-processing of the finite element simulations to determine if any failure criteria are met and to visualize the deformations, stresses and strains in ParaView using the exodus II file format (a subset of netCDF).

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2023

Coupling SCALE with DAKOTA for Axial Burnup Profiles Assessment in Burnup Credit

This paper presents a computational study that demonstrates the application of the SCALE code system in conjunction with the Design Analysis Kit for Optimization and Terascale Applications (DAKOTA) for the analysis of key factors influencing the evaluation of burnup credit (BUC) in pressurized water reactors (PWRs). The primary objective of this analysis is to characterize the model by utilizing parameterization, uncertainty quantification, and optimization studies. Using this approach, we can comprehensively assess the system and conduct informed predictive studies. This study highlights the effectiveness of the SCALE code system integrated within the DAKOTA framework in terms of efficiency and capability. With the coupling of the burnup code ORIGAMI with the CSAS or TSUNAMI-3D sequence embedded in a DAKOTA analysis, we can characterize the factors that influence the k eff of PWR 17x17 spent nuclear fuel (SNF) in the GBC-32 computational benchmark cask for the assessment of BUC in criticality safety analysis. The coupling methodology used in this study is not exclusive to BUC analysis. However, the choice to apply this methodology to the BUC problem is particularly significant because of the diverse range of aspects it encompasses in nuclear criticality safety analyses. This problem presents a unique opportunity to explore and address multiple facets of such analyses related to BUC and illustrates the capability of the SCALE code system with DAKOTA. This analysis makes use of historical reference data for the axial burnup profile, where the entire space within the bounds is considered. Both SCALE and DAKOTA are currently integrated in the Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling Simulation (NEAMS) Workbench code system, which has a user-friendly graphical interface that simplifies the setup of simulations and configuration of input parameters as well as the visualization of simulation results.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2014

SU-E-T-255: Optimized Supine Craniospinal Irradiation with Image-Guided and Field Matched Beams

Purpose: Conventional craniospinal irradiation (CSI) challenges include dose inhomogeneity at field junctions and position uncertainty due to the field divergence, particular for the two spinal fields. Here we outline a new supine CSI technique to address these difficulties. Methods: Patient was simulated in supine position. The cranial fields had isocenter at C2/C3 vertebral and were matched with 1st spinal field. Their inferior border was chosen to avoid the shoulder, as well as chin from the 1st spine field. Their collimator angles were dependent on asymmetry jaw setting of the 1st spinal field. With couch rotation, the spinal field gantry angles were adjusted to ensure, the inferior border of 1st and superior border of 2nd spinal fields were perpendicular to the table top. The radio-opaque wire position for the spinal junction was located initially by the light field from an anterior setup beam, and was finalized by the portal imaging of the 1st spinal field. With reference to the spinal junction wire, the fields were matched by positioning the isocenter of the 2nd spinal field. A formula was derived to optimize supine CSI treatment planning, by utilizing the relationship among the Yjaw setting, the spinal field gantry angles, cranial field collimator angles, and the spinal field isocenters location. The plan was delivered with portal imaging alignment for the both cranial and spinal junctions. Results: Utilizing this technique with matching beams, and conventional technique such as feathering and forwarding planning, a homogenous dose distribution was achieved throughout the entire CSI treatment volume including the spinal junction. Placing the spinal junction wire visualized in both spinal portals, allows for precise determination and verification of the appropriate match line of the spine fields. Conclusion: This technique of optimization supine CSI achieved a homogenous dose distributions and patient localization accuracy with image-guided and matched beams.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2022

Operational Probabilistic Tools for Solar Uncertainty (OPTSUN) (Final Project Report for DOE Solar Forecasting II Project)

Increasing levels of solar PV can challenge system operations and may require novel methods to operate the power system reliably and efficiently. Power system operating plans generally use deterministic forecasts, in which the variable energy resources are represented by the expected value for each interval of the decision horizon. Probabilistic forecasts are relatively new but have the potential to address the shortfalls of deterministic forecasts. However, understanding how best to use such forecasts is still a key gap in industry and was the focus of this project. The project had three workstreams. In a forecasting workstream, improvements were made to baseline probabilistic forecasts using a number of new approaches such as machine learning methods and improved input data. In a design workstream, advanced simulation tools used these forecasts to investigate newly proposed reserve determination methods. Lastly, in a demonstration workstream a scheduling management platform (SMP) was developed to leverage probabilistic forecasts in a modular and customizable manner. In order to study the benefits that could be accrued, the project team collaborated with three utility partners (Duke Energy, Southern Company and Hawaiian Electric) to deliver improved probabilistic forecasts for each region and to model each region in case studies using advanced production cost modeling tools. Different methods to determine operating reserve requirements from probabilistic forecasts were developed, simulated, and tested across each region. The benefits of using these newly proposed methods varied by utility, but, in general, using probabilistic forecasts as well as historical data to set the reserve requirements seems to improve reliability related results, with less risk of reserve or supply shortfalls. The cost implications were not always straightforward; in some cases the new methods could show a reduction in expected operating costs, but often the increase in reserves associated with better risk mitigation using probabilistic forecasts could result in an increase in operating costs in the simulations. The SMP tool was developed to process probabilistic forecasts from their initial receipt through to scheduling decisions. This open-source tool consists of several modules for scenario development, reserve requirements calculation, and visualization. The SMP tool was demonstrated to a wide range of operators and stakeholders at all three utilities and further improved based on their feedback. The tool will be available on www.epri.com/optsun. The proposed probabilistic information-based reserve determination approaches have the potential to be implemented by different regions to ensure an economic and reliable power system operation on power systems integrating increasing levels of variable renewable resources. The innovative yet practical methods developed in this project demonstrated tangible benefits from using probabilistic forecasts beyond just study-based assessments to include three unique balancing areas. The demonstrated benefits across the multiple utility environments, are expected to provide system operators in all regions the confidence required and a platform to adopt the new forecasting and operating methods.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

An Updated Visual Orbit of the Directly Imaged Exoplanet 51 Eridani b and Prospects for a Dynamical Mass Measurement with Gaia

We present a revision to the visual orbit of the young, directly imaged exoplanet 51 Eridani b using four years of observations with the Gemini Planet Imager. The relative astrometry is consistent with an eccentric (e=0.53{sub -0.13}{sup +0.09}) orbit at an intermediate inclination (i=136{sub -11}{sup +10} °), although circular orbits cannot be excluded due to the complex shape of the multidimensional posterior distribution. We find a semimajor axis of 11.1{sub -1.3}{sup +4.2} au and a period of 28.1{sub -4.9}{sup +17.2} yr, assuming a mass of 1.75 M{sub ⊙} for the host star. We find consistent values with a recent analysis of VLT/SPHERE data covering a similar baseline. We investigate the potential of using the absolute astrometry of the host star to obtain a dynamical mass constraint for the planet. The astrometric acceleration of 51 Eri derived from a comparison of the Hipparcos and Gaia catalogs was found to be inconsistent at the 2σ–3σ level with the predicted reflex motion induced by the orbiting planet. Potential sources of this inconsistency include a combination of random and systematic errors between the two astrometric catalogs and the signature of an additional companion within the system interior to current detection limits. We also explored the potential of using Gaia astrometry alone for a dynamical mass measurement of the planet by simulating Gaia measurements of the motion of the photocenter of the system over the course of the extended 8 yr mission. We find that such a measurement is only possible (>98% probability) given the most optimistic predictions for the Gaia scan astrometric uncertainties for bright stars and a high mass for the planet (≳3.6 M {sub Jup}).

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2023

NGEE Arctic Rainfall Simulator Validation Data from Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, Summer 2022

Experiments evaluating the uniformity and intensity of rainfall produced by the NGEE Arctic Rainfall Simulator (NARS) were conducted at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, over summer 2022. Petri dishes were placed in a grid within the NARS plot. Simulated rainfall was collected in each petri dish and the intensity and uniformity of the simulator was subsequently calculated. This data package contains two .csv files, one that summarizes the rainfall intensity and uniformity for each experiment, the other that contains individual petri dish water volume and intensity for each plot location and experiment. The Python scripts to control NARS are also included. The NGEE Arctic Rainfall Simulator (NARS) is a variable intensity rainfall simulator (RFS) with a frame design based on the Humphry et al. (2002) RFS and a water delivery system based on the Walnut Gulch (Paige et al., 2004) RFS. The NARS uses an aluminum frame that is fully deconstructable for transportation to field locations and a water system that enables variable rain intensity. Rain intensity control and data collection are automated using a Raspberry Pi microcomputer. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a 15-year research effort (2012-2027) to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2016

Fiber Bragg gratings-based sensing for real-time needle tracking during MR-guided brachytherapy

Purpose: The development of MR-guided high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy is under investigation due to the excellent tumor and organs at risk visualization of MRI. However, MR-based localization of needles (including catheters or tubes) has inherently a low update rate and the required image interpretation can be hampered by signal voids arising from blood vessels or calcifications limiting the precision of the needle guidance and reconstruction. In this paper, a new needle tracking prototype is investigated using fiber Bragg gratings (FBG)-based sensing: this prototype involves a MR-compatible stylet composed of three optic fibers with nine sets of embedded FBG sensors each. This stylet can be inserted into brachytherapy needles and allows a fast measurement of the needle deflection. This study aims to assess the potential of FBG-based sensing for real-time needle (including catheter or tube) tracking during MR-guided intervention. Methods: First, the MR compatibility of FBG-based sensing and its accuracy was evaluated. Different known needle deflections were measured using FBG-based sensing during simultaneous MR-imaging. Then, a needle tracking procedure using FBG-based sensing was proposed. This procedure involved a MR-based calibration of the FBG-based system performed prior to the interventional procedure. The needle tracking system was assessed in an experiment with a moving phantom during MR imaging. The FBG-based system was quantified by comparing the gold-standard shapes, the shape manually segmented on MRI and the FBG-based measurements. Results: The evaluation of the MR compatibility of FBG-based sensing and its accuracy shows that the needle deflection could be measured with an accuracy of 0.27 mm on average. Besides, the FBG-based measurements were comparable to the uncertainty of MR-based measurements estimated at half the voxel size in the MR image. Finally, the mean(standard deviation) Euclidean distance between MR- and FBG-based needle position measurements was equal to 0.79 mm(0.37 mm). The update rate and latency of the FBG-based needle position measurement were 100 and 300 ms, respectively. Conclusions: The FBG-based needle tracking procedure proposed in this paper is able to determine the position of the complete needle, under MR-imaging, with better accuracy and precision, higher update rate, and lower latency compared to current MR-based needle localization methods. This system would be eligible for MR-guided brachytherapy, in particular, for an improved needle guidance and reconstruction.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2017

Preface to the Special Issue on TOUGH Symposium 2015

The TOUGH Symposium 2015 was held in Berkeley, California, September 28-30, 2015. The TOUGH family of codes, developed at the Energy Geosciences Division of Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL), is a suite of computer programs for the simulation of multiphase and multicomponent fluid and heat flows in porous and fractured media with applications in many geosciences fields, such as geothermal reservoir engineering, nuclear waste disposal, geological carbon sequestration, oil and gas reservoirs, gas hydrate research, vadose zone hydrology and environmental remediation. Since the first release in the 1980s, many modifications and enhancements have been continuously made to TOUGH and its various descendants (iTOUGH2, TOUGH+, TOUGH-MP, TOUGHREACT, TOUGH+HYDRATE, TMVOC...), at LBNL and elsewhere. Today, these codes are used worldwide in academia, government organizations and private companies in problems involving coupled hydrological, thermal, biogeochemical and geomechanical processes. The Symposia, organized every 2-3 years, bring together developers and users for an open exchange on recent code enhancements and applications. In 2015, the Symposium was attended by one hundred participants, representing thirty-four nationalities. This Special Issue in Computers & Geosciences gathers extended versions of selected Symposium proceedings related to (i) recent enhancements to the TOUGH family of codes and (ii) coupled flow and geomechanics processes modeling. In this special issue, a paper by Jung et al. provides a new base version of TOUGH, TOUGH3. This latest version addresses the computational robustness and efficiency needed for the increasing complexity of the simulated processes and the growing size of model domains. Moreover, it consolidates the serial and parallel versions into a single code, hence, inconsistencies between different versions are less likely to occur, and code maintenance and development become more efficient. Finsterle et al. present a review of the capabilities of iTOUGH2 and illustrate the workflow of an integrated simulation-optimization framework. Liu et al. present an approach to reduce the computational cost of performing Bayesian inverse modeling and demonstrate their approach using a synthetic experiment simulated with TOUGH2. Regarding the mesh generation process, the paper by Doughty presents a generalization of the grid-generation algorithm embedded in TOUGH2 (MESHMAKER) to create one-column grids with fractal dimension, useful for representing flow through fractures or highly heterogeneous media with fractal geometry, and also for inverse methods. Sentís and Gable present a module to interface the open source code Lagrit with TOUGH2, that assists in the processes of mesh generation and model setup, and that can be particularly useful for complex geometries and large models. Bonduà et al. present a pre-processing tool (VORO2MESH) that features a full 3D Voronoi approach for structured and unstructured grids, and an enhanced post-processor (TOUGH2Viewer) for the visualization of 3D Voronoi grids. The literature review shows that coupled fluid flow and geomechanics has gained increasing attention in the last years in many geosciences fields. In this context, several codes of the TOUGH family have been successfully coupled with geomechanics software. The paper by Rutqvist presents a review of some of these TOUGH-based geomechanics models, of which the TOUGH-FLAC simulator – presented for the first time in the TOUGH Symposium 2003 – is well-known worldwide and has been used in a large variety of applications, encompassing the application domains of the TOUGH codes. Blanco-Martín et al. present an extension of TOUGH-FLAC to the finite strain framework, motivated by the existence of large strains associated with rock salt deformation in the context of heat-generating nuclear waste disposal. Following a paper published in the Special Issue of the TOUGH Symposium 2012 in this journal, Kim et al. present the current status of the TOUGH-RSBN simulator for coupled hydro-mechanical modeling of hydraulic fracturing using a discrete fracture network approach, and present some validation and demonstration cases. Rinaldi and Nespoli present TOUGH-SEED, an injection-induced seismicity modeling approach using TOUGH2 and a geomechanics stochastic model, and apply it to the Basel EGS project. Finally, Rinaldi et al. use the PEST protocol implemented in iTOUGH2, combined with TOUGH-FLAC as the forward model, to perform inverse modeling for the In Salah CO2 demonstration site in Algeria. Using pore pressures and InSAR displacements as observations, this approach allows for a multi-physics joint inversion and takes advantage of the inverse capabilities of iTOUGH2 (parameter estimation, sensitivity analysis, uncertainty estimation …), applied to coupled fluid flow and geomechanics. On behalf of the members of the TOUGH Symposium 2015 Organizing Committee, I hope that this collection of papers will provide the readers of Computers & Geosciences with a recent view of the capabilities of the TOUGH family of codes, as well as with current modeling research domains in the geosciences. Last but not least, I would like to express my gratitude to all the reviewers who kindly contributed to this Special Issue, as well as the Journal staff who have made this publication possible.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database v1.1

The Pan-Arctic Vegetation Cover (PAVC) database contains synthesized field-data observations of vegetation cover from 978 Arctic Alaska plots with observations from 2010 to 2021. The cover datasets contain plot data at both the plant functional type (PFT) and species-level resolution, with standardized PFT definitions and species names. We synthesized publicly available point-intercept and visual estimate plots from the Arctic Vegetation Archive of Alaska, the Alaska Vegetation Plots Database, the North Slope Science Catalog, and the National Ecological Observatory Network; as well as previously unpublished data from the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic).Users will find four synthesized datasets, 4 associated data descriptor (dd) files, and 1 metadata file in the PAVC database:synthesized_species_fcover.csv contains fractional cover (fcover) for unique accepted species names, where names include vegetation identified at the family, genus, species, subspecies, and variety levels, as well as general functional types across all 5 data sources. The synthesized_species_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.synthesized_pft_fcover.csv contains fcover for the following PFTs: non-vascular plants with lichen and bryophyte subcategories, trees with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, shrubs with deciduous and evergreen subcategories, graminoids (grasses), and forbs (herbaceous flowering plants) measured as total cover. Litter and “other” cover are also included as total cover. Additional “types” include water and bare ground, which were measured as top cover. The synthesized_pft_fcover_dd.csv accompanies this dataset with header information.species_pft_checklist.csv is a lookup table containing the translation from a dataset species name to an accepted species name and to a PFT. This table can be used to clarify our species to PFT adjudications, and to aid users in assigning their own PFTs. Any issues found in this checklist should be reported in the Issues tab of our github.survey_unit_information.csv contains auxiliary information about the plots synthesized in this database. It contains useful information for filtering plots of interest based on temporal, geospatial, and contextual information about the plot surveys.flmd.csv contains metadata information about each file in the database.This research was performed as a part of the NGEE Arctic project. The NGEE Arctic project was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

Shallow cumuli cover and its uncertainties from ground-based lidar–radar data and sky images

Cloud cover estimates of single-layer shallow cumuli obtained from narrow field-of-view (FOV) lidar–radar and wide-FOV total sky imager (TSI) data are compared over an extended period (2000–2017 summers) at the established United States Atmospheric Radiation Measurement mid-continental Southern Great Plains site. We quantify the impacts of two factors on hourly and sub-hourly cloud cover estimates: (1) instrument-dependent cloud detection and data merging criteria and (2) FOV configuration. Enhanced observations at this site combine the advantages of the ceilometer, micropulse lidar (MPL) and cloud radar in merged data products. Data collected by these three instruments are used to calculate narrow-FOV cloud fraction (CF) as a temporal fraction of cloudy returns within a given period. Sky images provided by TSI are used to calculate the wide-FOV fractional sky cover (FSC) as a fraction of cloudy pixels within a given image. To assess the impact of the first factor on CF obtained from the merged data products, we consider two additional subperiods (2000–2010 and 2011–2017 summers) that mark significant instrumentation and algorithmic advances in the cloud detection and data merging. We demonstrate that CF obtained from ceilometer data alone and FSC obtained from sky images provide the most similar and consistent cloud cover estimates; hourly bias and root-mean-square difference (RMSD) are within 0.04 and 0.12, respectively. However, CF from merged MPL–ceilometer data provides the largest estimates of the multiyear mean cloud cover, about 0.12 (35 %) and 0.08 (24 %) greater than FSC for the first and second subperiods, respectively. CF from merged ceilometer–MPL–radar data has the strongest subperiod dependence with a bias of 0.08 (24 %) compared to FSC for the first subperiod and shows no bias for the second subperiod. The strong period dependence of CF obtained from the combined ceilometer–MPL–radar data is likely results from a change in what sensors are relied on to detect clouds below 3 km. After 2011, the MPL stopped being used for cloud top height detection below 3 km, leaving the radar as the only sensor used in cloud top height retrievals. To quantify the FOV impact, a narrow-FOV FSC is derived from the TSI images. We demonstrate that FOV configuration does not modify the bias but impacts the RMSD (0.1 hourly, 0.15 sub-hourly). In particular, the FOV impact is significant for sub-hourly observations, where 41 % of narrow- and wide-FOV FSC differ by more than 0.1. A new “quick-look” tool is introduced to visualize impacts of these two factors through integration of CF and FSC data with novel TSI-based images of the spatial variability in cloud cover. The influence of cloud field organization, such cloud streets parallel to the wind direction, on narrow- and wide-FOV cloud cover estimates can be visually assessed.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗